NATO is United States and its satellites. So, pleading to US will solve nothing, as they bear significant responsibility for toppling of regimes, which were holding the tsunami back. See also Arab Spring. 
Topic: Illegal Migrant Crisis in Mediterraean (Read 6607 times)
Well Bryant, you just answered yourself NATO is United States and its satellites. So, pleading to US will solve nothing, as they bear significant responsibility for toppling of regimes, which were holding the tsunami back. See also Arab Spring.
NATO is United States and its satellites. So, pleading to US will solve nothing, as they bear significant responsibility for toppling of regimes, which were holding the tsunami back. See also Arab Spring. 
Any loss of life makes terrible news. In EU or US, nobody cares about the death of a Palestinian or a Syrian, but the death of a western soldier immediately makes headlines, and that's bad. You see the opposition asking about the reasons behind the sending of the troops, and calls to bring the boys home. I'm afraid no government from a leading NATO country is ready to accept that.
In that case, they could arm some of the local militias against the human traffickers, and seize the ports through them. (Just like the Kurds fighting against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq). But the problem is that NATO always ends up supporting the wrong people, and these people will just take up the Western weapons, and then join the Islamic State.
Many more Europeans will die, if the current migrant stream doesnt stop, yet Europe is unwilling to commit itself to solution. It has all the tools, but lacks will to use them. You could call it dusk of democracy.
Send in the Americans if the Europeans are so scared of fighting.
Well Countryfree,
you nailed it. It is political problem. Any midsized european country had resources to administer north Africa century ago. Yet current day degenerates are terrified of commitment. Hell, already in Somalia in early nineties, Americans won respectable military victory in Mogadishu. Yet, they lost 19 (!) men so it was considered as a debacle by the media. I mean, what the fuck?
Many more Europeans will die, if the current migrant stream doesnt stop, yet Europe is unwilling to commit itself to solution. It has all the tools, but lacks will to use them. You could call it dusk of democracy.
you nailed it. It is political problem. Any midsized european country had resources to administer north Africa century ago. Yet current day degenerates are terrified of commitment. Hell, already in Somalia in early nineties, Americans won respectable military victory in Mogadishu. Yet, they lost 19 (!) men so it was considered as a debacle by the media. I mean, what the fuck?
Many more Europeans will die, if the current migrant stream doesnt stop, yet Europe is unwilling to commit itself to solution. It has all the tools, but lacks will to use them. You could call it dusk of democracy.
This idea certainly looks good on paper, but it would be a major operation to take control of all ports in Lybia. With a serious risk of casualties for NATO troops.
There will be some NATO casualties for sure, if the rebel groups (especially the Islamic State) engages them. But since the NATO is a superior fighting force, they will be able to pull off this operation with minimal losses. The rebel groups are fighting against each other, and this has made them very weak, in terms of manpower and equipment.
Any loss of life makes terrible news. In EU or US, nobody cares about the death of a Palestinian or a Syrian, but the death of a western soldier immediately makes headlines, and that's bad. You see the opposition asking about the reasons behind the sending of the troops, and calls to bring the boys home. I'm afraid no government from a leading NATO country is ready to accept that.
This idea certainly looks good on paper, but it would be a major operation to take control of all ports in Lybia. With a serious risk of casualties for NATO troops.
There will be some NATO casualties for sure, if the rebel groups (especially the Islamic State) engages them. But since the NATO is a superior fighting force, they will be able to pull off this operation with minimal losses. The rebel groups are fighting against each other, and this has made them very weak, in terms of manpower and equipment.
Countryfree,
I respectfully disagree. If authorities are indeed shocked, it is by massive (yet, still pasive) resistance from natives, not by human waves from south.
I respectfully disagree. If authorities are indeed shocked, it is by massive (yet, still pasive) resistance from natives, not by human waves from south.
What resistance from natives? I've never seen that. In Calais, I've seen French people giving food and medical care to migrants. You can see them at work everyday. Yes, they are natives complaining, but I've never seen nor heard about a demonstration against the migrants. It's all silent.
One way for leaders to achieve increased control over their citizens would be to introduce a problem then provide a solution. If a majority of 'natives' of a country feel threatened by newcomers and have no realistic alternatives for 'protection' than the state, that's what they will choose. This could take the form of increased surveillance of society generally and an increase in the number and capabilities of state sponsored paramilitary assets.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
Brussels has yet to answer to the problems of these thousands of migrants who arrive every week. Ask anyone in Italy, he'll say the EU doesn't do anything, and that is correct. It is member states, Hungary beefing up its borders, France blocking the migrants in Ventimiglia, who act, leaving all the burden to countries on the Southern side, Italy or Greece.
Regarding protection, it isn't the issue here. There's about 40 millions people unemployed in EU. Many locals just wonder what will the migrants do if they're allowed to get in? This as a time where most countries are running a deficit.
Countryfree, 92% of my compatriots (Czechs) refused quota in public poll, despite nonstop guilt trip by local media. Last weekend 10 000 people demonstrated in Slovakia against further islamization of Europe, only 200 antifa members showed up to counter them.
In places such Austria, Hungary or southern Germany no demonstrations are needed as officials reflect on interests of their taxpayers.
Italy is border state, it recieves euro funds even from poorer member states just to protect Shengen zone. It doesnt do so. What it does instead is supporting refugee bussiness for its mafia. There is no higher power forcing Italians to take the rest of the world in, in that case, it might be better to build fence around Italy and wish them good luck.
80 million people every year are born into poverty. Right now, only about millions illegals plus million legal migrants are moving into EU and the system is already cracking. Can you do the math? Because I can. Guilt trip of western white man wont save the world, but it sure can get his family killed.
A demonstration of native Europeans against illegal immigrants! I guess Slovakia has a future. Such a thing would be unthinkable in richer western countries, there would be more "antifas" than demonstrators.
The things are not easy for Italy as European law prevents it from sending the immigrants back to Africa. It's easy to stop people at a border on land, but it's not on sea when they come on a sinking ship. You save them or you let them die, but this second option makes you a bad guy on the evening news.
It immigration and human-rights advocates argue that addressing the crisis will require Europe to look beyond its watery border and the people who seek to ferry refugees across it. 
The solution is very simple, and I don't know why the European Union is not interested in implementing it. Just send a few thousand NATO forces to the major Libyan and Tunisian ports. Take control of the ports, and destroy all the ferries and boats owned by the human smugglers. Never allow any refugee to board on a boat or ferry.
This idea certainly looks good on paper, but it would be a major operation to take control of all ports in Lybia. With a serious risk of casualties for NATO troops.
It immigration and human-rights advocates argue that addressing the crisis will require Europe to look beyond its watery border and the people who seek to ferry refugees across it.
The solution is very simple, and I don't know why the European Union is not interested in implementing it. Just send a few thousand NATO forces to the major Libyan and Tunisian ports. Take control of the ports, and destroy all the ferries and boats owned by the human smugglers. Never allow any refugee to board on a boat or ferry.
Bryant, you must be American
you have no idea how small-minded people on the continent can be, couple that with sense of false solidarity and equality (multiculturalism) and you´ve got bona fide bordello. It immigration and human-rights advocates argue that addressing the crisis will require Europe to look beyond its watery border and the people who seek to ferry refugees across it.
The solution is very simple, and I don't know why the European Union is not interested in implementing it. Just send a few thousand NATO forces to the major Libyan and Tunisian ports. Take control of the ports, and destroy all the ferries and boats owned by the human smugglers. Never allow any refugee to board on a boat or ferry.
One way for leaders to achieve increased control over their citizens would be to introduce a problem then provide a solution. If a majority of 'natives' of a country feel threatened by newcomers and have no realistic alternatives for 'protection' than the state, that's what they will choose. This could take the form of increased surveillance of society generally and an increase in the number and capabilities of state sponsored paramilitary assets.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
Brussels has yet to answer to the problems of these thousands of migrants who arrive every week. Ask anyone in Italy, he'll say the EU doesn't do anything, and that is correct. It is member states, Hungary beefing up its borders, France blocking the migrants in Ventimiglia, who act, leaving all the burden to countries on the Southern side, Italy or Greece.
Regarding protection, it isn't the issue here. There's about 40 millions people unemployed in EU. Many locals just wonder what will the migrants do if they're allowed to get in? This as a time where most countries are running a deficit.
As I say, it seems to me a reasonable hypothesis that Brussels does not see the issue as a 'problem' in the way that the locals do. The hypothesis continues that the 'solution' would be a general beefing up of state controlled domestic surveillance and paramilitary capabilities which are, of course, fairly easily moved from one task to another. From what I read here across the pond it seems that this is occurring here and there. It would be counter-productive for Brussels to comment on this if they do consider it a 'solution'.
Reason I found through search that 850 migrants are thought to have drowned this weekend —European officials scrambling to address the crisis at what is being called the world’s “deadliest border crossing.”
It immigration and human-rights advocates argue that addressing the crisis will require Europe to look beyond its watery border and the people who seek to ferry refugees across it.
If US thinks, it can sort out all these problems such as the refugees from Myanmar recently crossed their borders to get Asylum in Indonesia, United states can make the Myanmar government fear with the whip of one strong sanctions, which will force the Myanmar government to treat the Rohingya people kindly and give their citizen rights which they are deemed deserved.
WTF do you think the US is?
Myanmar is a sovereign country, and it has every right to exercise its sovereignty, unlike the American vassals in the Europe such as the United Kingdom and Germany. The Rohingya people are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, and it is not the responsibility of the Burmese people or the government there to feed and clothe them.
Unfortunately all these poor migrants just land up in the peripheral euro nations of the south whose resources are already stretched to the limit. The EU is hardly doing anything to alleviate the burden that Italy and Greece is mainly having and I wouldn't be surprised if they are also responsible, along with the U,S for all the political and economic turmoil in Africa that is a remnant of the old colonial times. 
If US thinks, it can sort out all these problems such as the refugees from Myanmar recently crossed their borders to get Asylum in Indonesia, United states can make the Myanmar government fear with the whip of one strong sanctions, which will force the Myanmar government to treat the Rohingya people kindly and give their citizen rights which they are deemed deserved.
Daniel,
you are emotional and question of national security should never be subject to emotions.
- Walls make good neighbours, not pleas.
- If those "refugees" got 10 000 dollars for smugglers and organized crime, then they have more than enough to feed themselves.
- Immigration to Americas? Well, ask all those Indians how that "enrichment" worked for them, why dont you?
- Europe is indeed aging as it is ruled by emotional, weak willed impotents, not hard working people, who made it stand out in the first place. How are migrants with no documents are language ability supposed to turn it around, I dont know. 91% Eritreans admitted into Switzerland stay on welfare system, so actualy you are wrong. Admitting these mean suckers (who often drown each other already at the sea for ethnic and religious reason) endangers Europes weakest - poor, old, women and manually working by draining public budgets and infrastructure further. Being charitable in this case means being inhuman to your own compatriots.
In fact, try to find calculator.
1 000 000 a x 18 000 b = c
A, number of illegals, that will enter Europe only in this year (previous ones are discounted for purposes of this example).
B, number of euros you will need to sustain every single one of them for one year.
C, money it takes to sustain 2015 newcomers for another 12 months.
Every migrant needs healthcare, increased security measures, housing, clothing and warm food three times a day. He will also retire or fall ill regardless, if he ever payed taxes in Europe or not.
- There are 2 000 000 000 (two billion) people around the world living under poverty line. Telling them, that 250 million of Europeans (those that work) will take care of not only themselves and their families but also for them, the foreign poor, no strings attached, is not just false, it is irresponsible and downright cruel. It is this utopic nonsense in the first place, that motivates current migrants into joining organized crime and risk their lives crossing the sea. To enter continent where nobody has any real use for them.
- Newcomers, who break the law already during crossing the borders dont deserve chance at "new life", you are only saying to both them and your own people, that it is okay to be criminal, if you belong to the right social or racial group.
EDIT: I am not against helping endangered and poor, quite the opposite, I wouldnt care about Europeans then also. I am for SOLUTION. And solutions start with solving the causes of problems, not symptoms (migrants). Helping in their home countries is good idea. Propagating anticonception is yet another good idea.
you are emotional and question of national security should never be subject to emotions.
- Walls make good neighbours, not pleas.
- If those "refugees" got 10 000 dollars for smugglers and organized crime, then they have more than enough to feed themselves.
- Immigration to Americas? Well, ask all those Indians how that "enrichment" worked for them, why dont you?
- Europe is indeed aging as it is ruled by emotional, weak willed impotents, not hard working people, who made it stand out in the first place. How are migrants with no documents are language ability supposed to turn it around, I dont know. 91% Eritreans admitted into Switzerland stay on welfare system, so actualy you are wrong. Admitting these mean suckers (who often drown each other already at the sea for ethnic and religious reason) endangers Europes weakest - poor, old, women and manually working by draining public budgets and infrastructure further. Being charitable in this case means being inhuman to your own compatriots.
In fact, try to find calculator.
1 000 000 a x 18 000 b = c
A, number of illegals, that will enter Europe only in this year (previous ones are discounted for purposes of this example).
B, number of euros you will need to sustain every single one of them for one year.
C, money it takes to sustain 2015 newcomers for another 12 months.
Every migrant needs healthcare, increased security measures, housing, clothing and warm food three times a day. He will also retire or fall ill regardless, if he ever payed taxes in Europe or not.
- There are 2 000 000 000 (two billion) people around the world living under poverty line. Telling them, that 250 million of Europeans (those that work) will take care of not only themselves and their families but also for them, the foreign poor, no strings attached, is not just false, it is irresponsible and downright cruel. It is this utopic nonsense in the first place, that motivates current migrants into joining organized crime and risk their lives crossing the sea. To enter continent where nobody has any real use for them.
- Newcomers, who break the law already during crossing the borders dont deserve chance at "new life", you are only saying to both them and your own people, that it is okay to be criminal, if you belong to the right social or racial group.
EDIT: I am not against helping endangered and poor, quite the opposite, I wouldnt care about Europeans then also. I am for SOLUTION. And solutions start with solving the causes of problems, not symptoms (migrants). Helping in their home countries is good idea. Propagating anticonception is yet another good idea.
This isn't a "migration." It's an INVASION and
This isn't a problem that appeared over the last few years
This isn't a problem that appeared over the last few years
So, if this in INVASION, as you called it, what is the solution then?
Raise a new wall in Europe, 25 years after the Berlin Wall fell, just as Hungary is planning to do now?
Maybe leave all these people to simply drown in the Mediterranean without the help and food?
Are not in the past millions of immigrants from Europe went to America and contributed to the growth and development of their new homeland, America?
Doesn't Europe began to age, the population is decreasing and fewer couples have children, and we see an increasing shortage of labor?
If so, why we can't give chance to these poor people from Africa for a new life?
This isn't a "migration." It's an INVASION and
This isn't a problem that appeared over the last few years
This isn't a problem that appeared over the last few years
Countryfree,
I respectfully disagree. If authorities are indeed shocked, it is by massive (yet, still pasive) resistance from natives, not by human waves from south.
I respectfully disagree. If authorities are indeed shocked, it is by massive (yet, still pasive) resistance from natives, not by human waves from south.
What resistance from natives? I've never seen that. In Calais, I've seen French people giving food and medical care to migrants. You can see them at work everyday. Yes, they are natives complaining, but I've never seen nor heard about a demonstration against the migrants. It's all silent.
One way for leaders to achieve increased control over their citizens would be to introduce a problem then provide a solution. If a majority of 'natives' of a country feel threatened by newcomers and have no realistic alternatives for 'protection' than the state, that's what they will choose. This could take the form of increased surveillance of society generally and an increase in the number and capabilities of state sponsored paramilitary assets.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
Brussels has yet to answer to the problems of these thousands of migrants who arrive every week. Ask anyone in Italy, he'll say the EU doesn't do anything, and that is correct. It is member states, Hungary beefing up its borders, France blocking the migrants in Ventimiglia, who act, leaving all the burden to countries on the Southern side, Italy or Greece.
Regarding protection, it isn't the issue here. There's about 40 millions people unemployed in EU. Many locals just wonder what will the migrants do if they're allowed to get in? This as a time where most countries are running a deficit.
Countryfree, 92% of my compatriots (Czechs) refused quota in public poll, despite nonstop guilt trip by local media. Last weekend 10 000 people demonstrated in Slovakia against further islamization of Europe, only 200 antifa members showed up to counter them.
In places such Austria, Hungary or southern Germany no demonstrations are needed as officials reflect on interests of their taxpayers.
Italy is border state, it recieves euro funds even from poorer member states just to protect Shengen zone. It doesnt do so. What it does instead is supporting refugee bussiness for its mafia. There is no higher power forcing Italians to take the rest of the world in, in that case, it might be better to build fence around Italy and wish them good luck.
80 million people every year are born into poverty. Right now, only about millions illegals plus million legal migrants are moving into EU and the system is already cracking. Can you do the math? Because I can. Guilt trip of western white man wont save the world, but it sure can get his family killed.
One way for leaders to achieve increased control over their citizens would be to introduce a problem then provide a solution. If a majority of 'natives' of a country feel threatened by newcomers and have no realistic alternatives for 'protection' than the state, that's what they will choose. This could take the form of increased surveillance of society generally and an increase in the number and capabilities of state sponsored paramilitary assets.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
Brussels has yet to answer to the problems of these thousands of migrants who arrive every week. Ask anyone in Italy, he'll say the EU doesn't do anything, and that is correct. It is member states, Hungary beefing up its borders, France blocking the migrants in Ventimiglia, who act, leaving all the burden to countries on the Southern side, Italy or Greece.
Regarding protection, it isn't the issue here. There's about 40 millions people unemployed in EU. Many locals just wonder what will the migrants do if they're allowed to get in? This as a time where most countries are running a deficit.
As I say, it seems to me a reasonable hypothesis that Brussels does not see the issue as a 'problem' in the way that the locals do. The hypothesis continues that the 'solution' would be a general beefing up of state controlled domestic surveillance and paramilitary capabilities which are, of course, fairly easily moved from one task to another. From what I read here across the pond it seems that this is occurring here and there. It would be counter-productive for Brussels to comment on this if they do consider it a 'solution'.
Countryfree,
I respectfully disagree. If authorities are indeed shocked, it is by massive (yet, still pasive) resistance from natives, not by human waves from south.
I respectfully disagree. If authorities are indeed shocked, it is by massive (yet, still pasive) resistance from natives, not by human waves from south.
What resistance from natives? I've never seen that. In Calais, I've seen French people giving food and medical care to migrants. You can see them at work everyday. Yes, they are natives complaining, but I've never seen nor heard about a demonstration against the migrants. It's all silent.
One way for leaders to achieve increased control over their citizens would be to introduce a problem then provide a solution. If a majority of 'natives' of a country feel threatened by newcomers and have no realistic alternatives for 'protection' than the state, that's what they will choose. This could take the form of increased surveillance of society generally and an increase in the number and capabilities of state sponsored paramilitary assets.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
Brussels has yet to answer to the problems of these thousands of migrants who arrive every week. Ask anyone in Italy, he'll say the EU doesn't do anything, and that is correct. It is member states, Hungary beefing up its borders, France blocking the migrants in Ventimiglia, who act, leaving all the burden to countries on the Southern side, Italy or Greece.
Regarding protection, it isn't the issue here. There's about 40 millions people unemployed in EU. Many locals just wonder what will the migrants do if they're allowed to get in? This as a time where most countries are running a deficit.
Somebody is hellbent on turning western Europe into third world shithole and those migrants sure as hell have neither capital, nor organization or common ideological ground to pull it off.
Not only Western Europe, the North America, Oceania (Australia and New Zealand), as well as countries in the Eastern Europe (Macedonia, Montenegro.etc) are witnessing unprecedented changes in their demographic makeup. A few countries in the East are still resisting the trend, such as Poland and Lithuania. But soon these countries will also change, as they are forced to accept hundreds of thousands of Sub-Saharans.
One way for leaders to achieve increased control over their citizens would be to introduce a problem then provide a solution. If a majority of 'natives' of a country feel threatened by newcomers and have no realistic alternatives for 'protection' than the state, that's what they will choose. This could take the form of increased surveillance of society generally and an increase in the number and capabilities of state sponsored paramilitary assets.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
You are both right, not that I am conspiracy theorist but this smells way too bad. Also good for BRIC countries to have sane leaders, future is theirs.
Today, Hungary closed down its border indefinitely for all undocumented visitors (European asylum policy was suspended). Last year country of 10 million in eastern Europe had to accept and feed 43 000 "refugees" (one refugee cost tax payer 1500 euro/month to sustain, "refugees" dont work). Earlier in june Austria stopped processing all new asylum demands. Federal states of Germany effectively restarted controls at borders.
Shengen is dying and rightfully so. EUs policy endangered citizens it was supposed to protect in the very first place. Even I am suprised how quickly this escalates.
In other news: Austria, Serbia and Hungary started shared border control on Serbian-Macedonian border. Every day 1000 new "refugees" try to cross it. Sustaining even one in EU compliant way costs tax payer 1500 euro/month.
Somebody is hellbent on turning western Europe into third world shithole and those migrants sure as hell have neither capital, nor organization or common ideological ground to pull it off.
Not only Western Europe, the North America, Oceania (Australia and New Zealand), as well as countries in the Eastern Europe (Macedonia, Montenegro.etc) are witnessing unprecedented changes in their demographic makeup. A few countries in the East are still resisting the trend, such as Poland and Lithuania. But soon these countries will also change, as they are forced to accept hundreds of thousands of Sub-Saharans.
One way for leaders to achieve increased control over their citizens would be to introduce a problem then provide a solution. If a majority of 'natives' of a country feel threatened by newcomers and have no realistic alternatives for 'protection' than the state, that's what they will choose. This could take the form of increased surveillance of society generally and an increase in the number and capabilities of state sponsored paramilitary assets.
I wonder if this is not one of the main driving forces behind the push to control guns in private hands here in the U.S. The more people feel confident that they can protect themselves, the less inclined they are to rely on the state for various kinds of protection.
As best I can tell from afar (sitting here on the West coast of the U.S.) it seems that Western Europe is a lot farther along the path to centralization and that planning and directing these population movements is handled mostly from Brussels. It's an interesting thing to watch. I'll be paying closer attention to the phenomenon.
Somebody is hellbent on turning western Europe into third world shithole and those migrants sure as hell have neither capital, nor organization or common ideological ground to pull it off.
Not only Western Europe, the North America, Oceania (Australia and New Zealand), as well as countries in the Eastern Europe (Macedonia, Montenegro.etc) are witnessing unprecedented changes in their demographic makeup. A few countries in the East are still resisting the trend, such as Poland and Lithuania. But soon these countries will also change, as they are forced to accept hundreds of thousands of Sub-Saharans.
Jump to: